<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<head>
    <title>OASIS - Reviews</title>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
    <meta name="Author" content="Fernando H. Canto" />
    <meta name="Keywords" content="Oasis, reviews, albums, Noel Gallagher, Liam Gallagher, Definitely Maybe, What's The Story Morning Glory" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" title="Classic Blue" href="code/classic.css" />
    <link rel="alternate stylesheet" title="Plainish" href="code/plain.css" />
</head>

<body>

<h1>
    OASIS
</h1>

<div class="quote">
    "We rule."<br />

    <img alt="Gem, Noel, Liam, Alan and Andy" src="images/oasis.png" />
</div>

<div class="members">
    Gem Archer, Noel Gallagher, Liam Gallagher, Alan White and Andy Bell<br />

    <a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/games/create.html">South Park Create-A-Character</a>
</div>

<p class="albumList">
  <a href="#maybe">Definitely Maybe</a><br />
  <a href="#glory">(What's The Story) Morning Glory?</a><br />
  <a href="#now">Be Here Now</a><br />
</p>

<p>I decided to add this band in here for, you know, a bit of <em>spice</em>. I mean, it gets boring when all artists are great, so I put this band here for some contrast. Since I own, well, at least 50% of their discography, I think I'm able to make a reviews page for Oasis.</p>

<p>Now, let me say this. Oasis is not a bad band. Creed is a bad band, Oasis isn't. Oasis is just mediocre. The musicians have okay skills with their instruments, Liam Gallagher is a good singer, and Noel Gallagher is a decent songwriter. So, Oasis are nothing outstanding, impressive, remarkable, noticeable, etc. You know, they're just 'a band'. Problem is, some idiots suddenly started to overrate this band so much, that it became unbelievably sickening to even hear the band's name. "The new Beatles," "true 60's rock 'n' roll," they called these guys everything that makes the veteran fans of rock shake their heads and mutter "my, the MTV generation is <em>doomed</em>." Oasis is not all that good, you know. And the fact that they're so overrated makes matters even worse.</p>

<p>What's funny, though, is that the Gallagher brothers took that into their own favour. Liam called himself "the reincarnation of John Lennon," Noel said they were "better than the Beatles and the Rolling Stones," and many rabid anti-Oasis flamers went berserk. But they failed to realise that it was all a <em>joke</em>. I, for one, <em>doubt</em> that the brothers mean it when they say that. They're just poking fun at whomever praises them like gods. But then, you look at the albums, and see that their musical quality isn't really that hot. It seems the guys are trying too hard, like they <em>know</em> where they want to go to, but are unable to get there. Maybe they should stop ripping off the Stereophonics and mind their own business? Who knows, <strong>(What's The Story) Morning Glory</strong> rules, and that's all that matters.</p>

<p><em>Reader comments:</em></p>

<div class="commentsHeader">
      <strong><a href="mailto:dmoses@btinternet.com">David Moses</a> (February 20, 2005):</strong>
</div>

<div class="comments">
<p>Hello</p>
 
<p>Well written reviews. But how can you claim Liam can sing? He actually has no tonality to his voice whatsoever. His brother is fairly talented and could write OK songs, but his brother rode high on his success and used his non talented snarls and pathetic image to carry the band. He is a talentless idiot, who was lucky his brother agreed to recruit him in the band. <span class="edNote">[editor's note: Oh, I don't think Liam is that bad, actually, as far as his singing was concerned. He could hit the right notes, and I think his voice fits the songs just fine. Of course, I can't say much more in his defence. :-)]</span></p>
 
<p>HAd to get that off my chest!</p>
 
<p>David</p>
</div>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail your ideas</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="maybe">Definitely Maybe (1993)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Slide Away</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Rock 'n' Roll Star <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Shakermaker</li>
  <li><span class="good">Live Forever ++</span></li>
  <li>Up In The Sky <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Columbia <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Supersonic ++</span></li>
  <li>Bring It On Down</li>
  <li>Digsy's Dinner</li>
  <li>Cigarettes 'n' Alcohol</li>
  <li><span class="good">Slide Away ++</span></li>
  <li>Married With Children</li>
</ol>

<p>This is the album that critics and the like often define as Oasis's "classic". And I'd say that's only because this is their debut, and because it <em>did</em> break into the scene with a bang. And <em>what</em> a bang - not in terms of quality, but in terms of <em>loudness</em>. Really, this is one of the classic examples of the "the louder, the better" philosophy, which states that a song, in order to "rock", must be entirely made with two or three guitars strumming distorted guitars <em>constantly</em>, with the dymanic range squashed mercilessly in order to make the recording as loud as possible. Really: if you want loud music, you'll have to swallow this distorted, clipped horrid production; if you <em>don't</em> want loud music, you should get out and wank off to your Kenny G, you fag.</p>

<p>Actually, I don't really mind the distortion that much. What I <em>do</em> mind is that <em>all of the first ten songs sound like that</em>. Just as a non stop eardrum slaughtering burst of distorted ends, another begins. It might even be a fine, easy-going almost "pop" song, but they crank up the distortion and strum away their noisy open chords. And the only song that doesn't follow that style is the last one, 'Married With Children', a goofy, "bluesy" tune with quiet, strummed guitar. That is, you can only relax and goof off after you proved the world, for forty-five minutes straight, that you "rock". Fine, then. Oh, well, I suppose 'Digsy's Dinner' is pretty goofy, too, but the guitars don't give any break at all, here. Perhaps it's not a coincidence, but 'Digsy's Dinner' and 'Married With Children' bookend the climactic "epic" Of the album, 'Slide Away', but let's talk about that song in particular later on.</p>

<p>To make a gross generalisation, I could say that you either: heard the album, because it was really popular back then (and maybe still is) or; you keep a distance from the album, because you hate Oasis, those arrogant jerks. Still, you might have a good idea of how the album is, overall, and it's <em>easy</em> to imagine how the whole thing sounds like. After all, through their entire carreer, Oasis' songs all sound pretty much the same. And if you need to <em>listen</em> to how the whole album sounds like, 'Live Forever' is all you need; maybe 'Rock 'n' Roll Star' too, for their "fast" side. You just have to picture that wall of guitar distortion, that sluggish, "stuttering" drum pattern they use in <em>all</em> their "slower than average" songs, and Liam Gallagher's remarkably unforgettable voice on top. Presto. And from tracks 1 to 10, the only thing that truly varies is the tempo. The songs, well, the songs aren't anything that would justify the status of <em>90's masterpiece</em>, but they're still surprisingly solid. Noel's smart and talented enough to throw in a good, catchy melody, maybe even a clever guitar line, and also some attention-grabbing guitar solos. The band isn't intent on making the songs stick on your mind until the end of time (at least, I suppose), but they <em>are</em> intent on getting your ears perked up and stuck to the speakers. And when <em>I</em> am listening to this stuff, with very little effort, I <em>do</em> fall into a good syntony with the music.</p>

<p>And it isn't about the bandwork, is it? The four players get solid rhythms going on at all times, but they never dare to steal the spotlight. And Liam, no matter what he tries to tell you, <em>is not</em> John Lennon. His voice isn't pleasant, resonant or gorgeous, and he doesn't put out an awe-inspiring, jaw-dropping performance. He just keeps that lazy, stinging, grinding tone of voice that manages to cut through the thick wall of sound and come out at the very top. The magic lies in how well his voice interacts with the music, and with the <em>attitude</em> it settles. Liam's singing truly cements that vision of Noel Gallagher strumming away his guitar with his shades on, a cigarette held between his teeth, and a face expression that says "I don't give a shit about the world". And <em>that's</em> what makes the album work. It's <em>that</em> that truly makes the feeling come alive and <em>stay</em> there, until the album ends, at least. And one thing is certain: you might hate Liam's singing (or even Liam <em>himself</em>), but I don't think anyone else can say "sunshee-ine" as well as he does!</p>

<p>And through these fifty minutes, the album just <em>really</em> falters in 'Shakermaker', in which the sluggishness, the monotonousness in Liam's voice, and the monstrousity of the distorted sound becomes a bit difficult to deal with. To put it in more un-Fernie-like terms, it's "boring". The others? Oh, <em>now</em> you're speaking. Surprisingly, I'm more partial to the slower songs in here, but I don't think there's any specific reason. My favourite tracks happen to be 'Live Forever' (duh!) and 'Slide Away'. In the former, it's like the whole aura of don't-give-a-damnness is removed for a while, because the band actually has something meaningful to say. It's just a <em>feeling</em>, and I might be just making things up, but it <em>does</em> make the song more dramatic, more edgy... and maybe even a bit cathartic. Just a bit. And the latter, well, I love it. Perhaps after so much "arrogant" rock 'n' roll, they manage to put out a soaring "anthem" that doesn't really smell of fluffy self-importance. It must have something to do, once again, with Liam's performance, and that nifty, subtle guitar riff. Of course, you'll have to handle the lengthy ending and all the repetition. It's not like I don't like repetition, but repetition isn't <em>always</em> mantraic and hypnotic the way I like, and if I'm in the wrong mood, this kind of stuff can get on my nerves. Fortunately, the song is just too good.</p>

<p>But there are other songs, too. And I really like 'Supersonic', with <em>another</em> nifty, subtle guitar riff, and a tr&egrave;s catchy chorus melody. For some reason, I also like the speedy drive of the classic 'Rock 'n' Roll Star' (with its gloriously juvenile lyrics; either really silly lyricwriting, or it was Noel's very intention. If you ask him, he'll certainly tell it's the latter) and 'Up In The Sky'. 'Columbia' also has that groovy rhythm - a small, but fresh diversion from the straightforward 4/4 rhythn and the "stuttering" pattern that takes over every other song. And while most people seem to love 'Cigarettes And Alcohol', I don't think I ever truly got it. It's a pretty damn well done song, but I'm afraid I'm just not a fan of the style.</p>

<p>Of course, your picks of "favourite songs" may be completely different to mine, what with all songs sounding so similar. And I'm no rabid fan to like every song here - and I'd even take a wild guess that not even the proverbial "rabid fan" loves every song here. Such a person must exist, but he'd be promoted to the level of "diehard freak", so let's not count him in. Did you ever meet an Oasis diehard freak, by the way? And when you said the word "Beatles" before him, did he melt?</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Depends on how tolerant I am to this stuff at the moment. It's 45 minutes of sameyness, you know!<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>12/15</strong></big> - The attitude and the energy makes this stuff work. It's the reason why I listen to it.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>8/15</strong></big>  - Um... I don't want to be mean, but... help.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Good songs, catchy stuff. Mostly.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>8/15</strong></big>  - Huh!
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/10.png" alt="10" />
</p>

<p>Comments? "Blur is better" debates? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="glory">(What's The Story) Morning Glory? (1995)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Hey Now</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Hello <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Roll With It</li>
  <li>Wonderwall <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Don't Look Back In Anger <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Hey Now ++</span></li>
  <li>&nbsp;</li>
  <li>Some Might Say <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Cast No Shadow <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>She's Electric</li>
  <li>Morning Glory</li>
  <li>&nbsp;</li>
  <li><span class="good">Champagne Supernova ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>If I were a pretentious dork, I could say this album was made for me. And
since that's what I am, that's what I'm saying. Of course, back in 1995, I was
9-years-old, and I doubt Noel Gallagher was thinking of <em>me</em> when he
wrote these songs, but... Eh, it's an expression, y'know? Remember, <em>I</em>
am the pretentious dork, and <em>I</em> must teach things and <em>you</em> must
act like you didn't know them before.</p>

<p>So, let me teach these things: Oasis' second album improves exactly on the
areas I wished Oasis would improve; though I'm only saying that in retrospect,
because I heard this album <em>first</em>. But really, Noel and the band went
ahead and mostly eliminated the sameyness, uniformity and <em>dullness</em> of
the first album, and as a result, produced an album that's much, much less
likely to be hailed as a "classic" by the snob critics. After all, since it
tries to do <em>more than one</em> things at once, it's not "iconic" and all
that. But am <em>I</em> a snob critic? That I am NOT, sir! I hate that word
"critic" being applied to me. So, my opinion is that Oasis did a fine move here,
and as a result, produced my favourite Oasis album to this moment.</p>

<p>It's not <em>great</em>, however. Calling an Oasis album "great" would
require quite a lot of effort from my part. But this one is definitely an
excellent one. It isn't even because of the "classic" songs here. I'll be blunt
and say I'm not too enamoured by the smashing hit 'Wonderwall'. Yes, it's a
beautiful, slightly ominous acoustic ballad with an adequate vocal performance
by Liam and interesting arrangements all around, but for everything that's
sacred, I swear I just can't understand why it was such a phenomenally
successful single. Maybe I'm ignorant, but I have no reasonable answer to that
question. I, personally, even prefer 'Don't Look Back In Anger', which not only
draws those opening piano chords from 'Imagine', but also is an attempt at a
blatantly "anthemic" song. But does that really harm the song? Not at all. Noel
does the right decision of singing the song himself, and the beautiful melody
manages to rise above that standard, "stuttering" pattern the band uses in
pretty much all of their "slower" songs. It's not "grandiose" or "soaring", but
it's just solid.</p>

<p>The truth is that, even though I <em>honestly</em> appreciate the band's
attempt at diversifying the recipe a bit, the "rock" songs here happen to be my
favourite ones - also because they try to deviate from the norm as well.
'Hello', for example, has got the loud rhythms, the distortion and the
relentless drumming, but it puts aside the 4/4 pattern for a moment and goes for
a faster, swinged rhythm, complete with a "bouncing echo" effect on Liam's
voice. Catchy tune, too. I also like that retardedly funny trick they do right
at the beginning, starting the album with 'Wonderwall' but in a very low volume,
probably motivating the unsuspecting listener to pump up the volume. And
suddenly, the guitar hiccups and blasts out that bending riff. How's that for
"deceiving", huh? Huh? Huh?</p>

<p>I'm also a fan of 'Hey Now', mostly because it's a weirdly pleasant,
"relaxed" rock song with a catchy tune and solid band work. Noel includes a
Mellotron towards the end, and while it might be an easy attempt at sounding "in
it", it <em>is</em> an improvement over the uniformity of <strong>Definitely
Maybe</strong>. The instrument is even more prominent on the slower, gentler
'Cast No Shadow', which is a <em>solid</em> ballad, even better than both
'Wonderwall' and 'Don't Look Back In Anger'. But it's 'Hey Now' that truly grabs
me here. Oh, yes, 'Champagne Supernova' is supposed to be the grand magnum opus
of the album, but hey... Even though I could easily spit a few words of venom
towards it, I'll just admit that I like the song quite a lot. It's strange: Noel
clearly intended to make a "grander" opus out of the song, but it manages to
sound natural and non-contrived - contrary of 'All Around The World' on the
following album, of course. 'Champagne Supernova' does stomp on the stuttering
rhythm a bit more, yes, but the song as a whole is just dandy.</p>

<p>There's more, oh, there certainly is. 'Some Might Say' is a fine, fine, fine
faster (though not exactly <em>fast</em>) tune, which I happen to like. 'Roll
With It' isn't really that great, but it doesn't harm me the least. Oh, yes, you
should be ready to have some of those "repeat one single line a hundred times
before the song ends" codas, but hey, every band presents its own challenges.
'She's Electric' is the album's 'Disgy's Dinner', but bringing in some fairly
direct Beatles rip-offs (the finale sounding similar to 'With A Little Help From
My Friends', and the melody in the chorus based on 'While My Guitar Gently
Weeps' - I remember trying to convince a fan of that similarity, and facing
difficulty. Maybe the primary requisite for being an Oasis fan is not being able
to tell apart a <em>whole song</em> from a <em>single melody</em>?). There's the
"ugly", angry 'Morning Glory', faster than usual and with a quite catchy chorus.
Also a difference from the "optimistic" aura that reigned supreme in their first
record. Those untitled songs are actually small extracts of an instrumental
song, which would be released as 'The Swamp Song' on their B-sides compilation
<strong>The Masterplan</strong>.</p>

<p>You shouldn't fool yourself and expect this album to be a big <em>stylistic
change</em> from <strong>Definitely Maybe</strong>. Their style and sound hasn't
really changed - this time, they're only trying to do some more interesting
variations with it. And yes, I like the results, and I think they should have
went on like this. To put it annoyingly, if you <em>do</em> think of this album
as a stylistic change, you'll have to accept the next album as an unfortunate
rollback. But you can always be cynical and think of this album as an accidental
good record in the rough beginnings of a carreer of mediocrity. Or you can just
hate Oasis entirely and hate this record too. It's all up to you, anyway. Shut
up and die.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Yes! Very nice stuff. Okay, okay, <em>good</em>, not nice.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>13/15</strong></big> - There's energy, and not always the same "idealistic" energy all the way through.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>12/15</strong></big> - For Oasis standards, it's the most innovative thing ever...<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Good songs. Very good songs, indeed.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Yes, it's consistent enough. I'll give it a plus here.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/13.png" alt="13" />
</p>

<p>Comments? Raves? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="now">Be Here Now (1997)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Stand By Me</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>D'ya Know What I Mean? <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>My Big Mouth</li>
  <li>Magic Pie <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Stand By Me ++</span></li>
  <li>I Hope, I Think, I Know</li>
  <li>The Girl In The Dirty Shirt</li>
  <li>Fade In-Out</li>
  <li><span class="good">Don't Go Away ++</span></li>
  <li>Be Here Now</li>
  <li>All Around The World <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>It's Getting Better (Man!!) <span class="bad">&times;</span></li>
  <li>All Around The World (reprise)</li>
</ol>

<p>Ehh... Well, even Noel himself calls this Oasis's worst album. I don't know
if I agree, after all, I'm yet to hear all following Oasis albums, but I can't
say he's betraying the truth here. But really, we're not talking about a
<em>bad</em> album. <strong>Be Here Now</strong> is just a painful, frustrating
de-evolution for the band, and not only that: it's bloated, saturated and
<em>long</em>; very, <em>very</em> long. It's a single CD, but it feels like
it's longer than that. And why, you ask? Because all damn songs fall under the
weight of those excruciatingly loud and irritating distorted guitars. Once
again, the guitarists pump up the distortion to the bloody max just to strum.
It's like loudness is the <em>philosophy</em> of the album: leave no note
un-distorted and no dynamics un-squashed. And, oh yes, <em>oh</em>, yes yes:
leave no song without an endlessly repeated verse at the coda. Since pretty much
every song needs to break the five minute mark, it's either slow and draggy, or
never knows the right time to stop.</p>

<p>So there: you've got a formula that's potentially dangerous to even the best
song selections. But the song selection here isn't what I would call
"excellent", either. <strong>Definitely Maybe</strong> has a better set of
songs, even. Really, I don't have that many good things to say about 'My Big
Mouth', for example. I can't call it bad either, but a song that long, distorted
beyond proportion like <em>that</em> simply can't be regarded as "pleasant".
It's got a good riff, though, and I don't think I can hear one in the title
track, for example. 'Fade In-Out' takes its bitter acoustic guitar plucking and
drives it into the same hellish pit of acoustic mess as before, with the title
endlessly repeated as the song ends. 'It's Getting Better (Man!!)', in that
aspect, is even more offensive. At this point, my ears are barely able to detect
any difference between this and 'My Big Mouth': the fast rhythm is the same, the
splashing drums are also there, the guitar riff is more or less the same, and
the repetition is mind-numbing. Again, it's not a problem with the song itself:
the treatment it gets and its placement in the album just wipe out any signs of
possible enjoyment from it.</p>

<p>Oh, and while we're on the topic of "repetition", I should mention Oasis's
blatant attempt at making their own 'Hey Jude' here: 'All Around The World'
sounds exactly as idealistic and hippie-like as its title suggests, has a fairly
catchy chorus, climactic modulations and a bombastic, <em>lengthy</em> coda with
a melody inviting you to "na na na" along. Of course, it doesn't limit itself to
mere seven minutes, so it goes up to nine. And as if it wasn't enough, it's
reprised at the end, with a more "orchestral" arrangement. Surprisingly, I
actually like the song more than a bit. Probably because it doesn't spend all
its energy and running length to be as bombastic and universalistic as possible.
It has a sense of humour and self-counsciousness that makes it sound more like
a humble immitation (as in "tribute") of McCartney's own "na na na" epic. I also
like the other "epic", 'Magic Pie', to a lesser extent. It's sweeping (i.e.
sluggish) and grand (i.e. dragging), but Noel's singing does it a good service.
The opener, 'D'ya Know What I Mean', is also likeable, with a more "serious"
tone. The heavy, pounding rhythm makes it better than 'Morning Glory' to me, for
example, and the ending with the waves of guitar distortion and feedback works
pretty well. The song is an example of those Oasis songs that are <em>bound</em>
to be not good, but actually work; mostly because they aren't excessive.</p>

<p>As for the songs I <em>really</em> like a lot, they're the ballads.
Unsurprisingly, the quietest, gentlest song is one of the best. 'Don't Go Away'
isn't an impressive, Earth-shattering love ballad, but Noel's nice hooks and
Liam's sensitive vocal delivery are more than badly needed at this point in the
album. And, for once, as if my prayers were heard high in the sky, they TURN
DOWN their guitars a little. 'Stand By Me', though, blasts the distortion up the
roof again, and even though it's mostly  a second attempt at 'Live Forever',
it's quite pretty.</p>

<p>The album as a whole falls really flat, though. And I can't even say that
it's just the production that harms it. It's like the songs are so primitive and
simplistic that Noel felt the need to try to fill in the gaps with very, very
loud guitars and endless finales. And that's the result... a really annoying
record with a couple of fine songs in it. I can't give it a very high rating,
though fans of <strong>Definitely Maybe</strong> might be a bit more partial
towards this album. So, just take this as personal style, good taste, common
sense, whatever.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>10/15</strong></big> - It's fun a times, yes. Very irritating at others.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>8/15</strong></big>  - The whole album is awfully sluggish and tired. It's like an immensely amplified moan.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>7/15</strong></big>  - Any more original than <strong>Definitely Maybe</strong>? Not at all.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>10/15</strong></big> - There <em>is</em> good music in here. It's just repeated ad nauseum.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - Nah. It's years long.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/09.png" alt="9" />
</p>

<p>Comments? Rants? Death threats? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<p><a href="index.htm">Back to the Reviews Page index</a></p>

<p>
  <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><img
      src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10"
      alt="Valid XHTML 1.0!" height="31" width="88" /></a>
</p>

</body>

</html>